Wikipedia, not legitimate

          Most of us heard of Wikipedia. You may have used Wikipedia as a reference for a paper you had to write for a class, or for business reasons. I remember hearing about some schools that is not recognizing Wikipedia as legitimate source of information.

            During Wikipedia early days as an online free encyclopedia anyone who is registered could sign into it and write and edit any subjects without any supporting reference. So during Wikipedia early days it was look upon with contempt, and not a trusted or legitimate source.

            Later Wikipedia tried to gain legitimacy by requiring the writer or editor to back their information up with third-party media articles. But if you write something negative, even with supporting documents about President Obama, it is deleted. For example, Aaron Klein of the WorldNetDaily, had a Wikipedia user “Jerusalem21” add the following to Obama’s page:

“There Have been some doubts about whether Obama was born in the U.S after the politician refused to release to the public a carbon copy of his birth certificate and amid claims from his relatives he may have been born in Kenya. Numerous lawsuits have been filed petitioning Obama to release his birth certificate, but most suits have been thrown out by the courts.”

            Two third-party media articles was used as supporting documents which are the Chicago Tribune and WordNetDaily.com, as required on the online encyclopedia Wikipedia.

After the entry was posted on Wikipedia on Feb 24, at 6:16 p.m. EST. a Wikipedia administrator removed the entry three minutes later citing the posting violated the websites rules against “fringe” material.

            “Jerusalem21” tried to repost the entry about Obama’s eligibility later for a second time. Another administrator on Wikipedia removed the entry two minutes later, and banned the user from posting anything on the website for three days. 

            For a month the WorldNetDaily has monitored several attempts to add eligibility issues to Obama’s Wikipedia page. The information was deleted within minutes and the user that was posting was barred from the website for three days.

            You will not find any information about Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright in Obama’s bio.

            The paragraph state: “Obama explained how, through working with black churches as a community organizer while in his twenties, he came to understand ‘the power of the African American religious tradition to spur social change.’ He was baptized at the Trinity United Church of Christ in 1988 and was as active member there for two decades.”

            Wikipedia description of William Ayers’ of the Weathermen and un-repented terrorist makes him out to be a boy scout.

            But if you read the entry on Wikipedia about President George W. Bush it is highly Criticized .        

            Wikipedia is not legitimate, and is not un-biased. Be seriously careful if use this Wikipedia as a source of references.